Surely, those writers who are now deceased won't cause anyone any political distress......the only distress I can imagine would involve their family when they read of their departed being described as a nutbag.

Erm, if they understand contex and can identify blatant irony, I doubt they'll be too offended, given that Matt Price was the exact opposite of a right wing nutbag. But I'm sure they'll be glad to know you are looking out for them.

[quote]"and the point is that the Left that I can think of, does consist solely of the rabid left these days."[/quote]

Extremes of either side just lead to pointless point scoring.

The "rabid" left are just as bas as the looney right, but the fact is that the Labor party are essentially very little different from the Liberal party when it comes to economic policy, and if you look at some of the "nanny state" actions and proposals of the Liberal Party (baby bonus, paid maternity leave) you could be forgiven for thinking that the Libs are taking a step to left.

I fail to see why all hands and the cook get so excited about this ABC offering.Like "The Drum" it's crap. Catering to the Lunatic Fringe both in audience and panel it should properly be broadcast at 3.00 am.It's about time the ABC stopped transmitting this bottom end budget stuff and gave us some quality (and please ... NO MORE Australian "drama" starring the usual suspects).Every day in every way, the ABC slips a little further down the slope.

Hey demodocus, I object being called among the Lunatic Fringe. I watch 4 corners, Q&A, the drum, Capital Hill and anything else that's going via the ABC.At least we get some quality on our ABC unlike the commercial networks, Laurie Oaks is probably the only commercial broadcaster worth listening to. Four Corners first show for the year on education was excellent, not a politican in sight. The return of Q&A was just so/so except for Penny Wong who is a calm, sensible voice of reason. As for 'that Sloan woman' she is so rude to others and expects the viewer to think she knows what she is talking about The Drum should really take her off the list.

Rudd would get an enomous sympathy vote if he led them into the next election, they still wouldn't win but it may not be the wipeout thats facing them now.

Simon Crean is a useless creep, still remember he and Lindsay Fox hanging pout the cockpit of an Ansett plane, promising the staff they would save the airline, then when the Govt wouldn't agree to cover their losses he dumped those people on their heads.Creeps and parasites. thats all they are.

I see the IPA has wormed its way into Q&A yet again, along with its regular spots on The Drum, one may reach the conclusion that this group has some influence within ABC management.

It's just a bunch of conservative navel gazers thinking up new ways to make a small number of people richer, so why their extremely narrow point of view is relevant to the majority of us needs to be explained by the people who select panellists for ABC programs.

[quote]"I see the IPA has wormed its way into Q&A yet again, along with its regular spots on The Drum, one may reach the conclusion that this group has some influence within ABC management."[/quote]

It is a bit annoying when organisations suddenly spring up and their name hide their political leaning ... Get Up! .... Centre for Policy Development ... Liberty Victoria.

But I dont see why you're getting so excited Rumpole. I'm sure that QandA will get into the usual ratio of '5' ... 2 Right wingers up against 3 Lefties ... with Jones interrupting the Conservatives as soon as they begin speaking.

[quote]" [quote]"I see the IPA has wormed its way into Q&A yet again, along with its regular spots on The Drum, one may reach the conclusion that this group has some influence within ABC management."[/quote]"[/quote]

I like hearing Tim Wilson speak, regardless of whether I agree with what he's saying, because he is articulate and intelligent. When I agree with him I enjoy hearing ideas I agree with expressed well, and when I disagree or have doubts I like the opportunity to put my own opinions to the test.

What I can't understand is why they put that comedian on the panel. He had little to contribute and was really just as distraction from a more serious and worthwhile discussion. Was he just filling in because you couldn't get anyone else, Auntie?

[quote]"What I can't understand is why they put that comedian on the panel. He had little to contribute and was really just as distraction from a more serious and worthwhile discussion. Was he just filling in because you couldn't get anyone else, Auntie?"[/quote]

Yes, Mikey Robbins was a waste of time, but I agree Wilson is easy to listen to even if we don't agree , but his virws are extreme and out of touch with reality.

The real star for me was Robert Manne, a voice of reason among the flim flam politicians.

I've been intending to keep track of the number of times that Jones interrupts the Coalition politician.

Last week after from hearing other panellists, I think the question dealt with Banks, he turned to Helen Kroger and said,"Helen?" She took about one nanosecond to utter, "Umm'before Jones quickly said, something like,"By the way do you agree with giving subsidies to automotive industries?"

Its getting very annoying to hear him say "I'm sorry but ..." when interrupting a panellist (mainly the Tory ones but, yes occasionally, also the others).One day someone will say to him, " No! Tony you are not sorry ... if you were , then you wouldnt do it. I'm answering the question raised by the member of the audience ... if you dont like that, say so and I'll pass to the next panelist."

I remember him from the days when he and his son conspired to defraud the Commonwealth. Peter Reith gave his Commonwealth paid mobile telephone to his son for his own perspnal use. His son not only seized the advantage for himself but he also made it freely available to his friends who made it available to their friends. Peter Reith refused to pay the charges for the telephone which were in the region of sixty thousand dollars but the son's acquaintances were more honest than either of the Reiths and came forward and paid the debt. They hadn't known that the telephone made available to them was Commonwealth property.

I understand that GetUp's source of funding is from donations from individuals. These donations are not tax deductible, not political, not racial and not associated with any religion.I understand that individuals can make a regular donation or only to the particular cause that they consider important. They are not obliged to subscribe to a cause that they do not believe should be supported. Subscribers have been requested to list their preferences for action. Top priority action in 2012 is promotion of investment in renewable energy.

I'm no fan of P.Reith, but the allegations about him listed above are not correct.

It was in fact a phone card and pin number, not an actual mobile phone, that he gave to his son. His son racked up about a grand's worth of calls on it, and then friends of that son another 50-odd grand.

The nub of it is - Peter Reith paid the money back himself. He covered himself in ignominy before doing so, blustering and dissembling and obfuscating, but in the end it was he who coughed up.

Grrrrrrrrr Someone needs to gag Tony Jones. Tonight he was the worst that he has been. Interrupting constantly & going on like the preverbial pork chop. (that's a Yorkshirism in case you are wondering) Both my husband & I were ready to chuck summat at the TV on a number of occasions !! Gee, I feel better now getting that off me chest.

I think Reiths phone-card mooching was worth a bit more than $1000..I recall it at nearer 50 1000s...

the most nauseating and galling thing about it , which was that when it was suggested Reith repay the money, which seems to me to be assumed without any question, he started blubbering about having to sell his house.

Reith was a very wealthy man owned half of Mornington peninsula as I have it (even if a slight exaggeration, so what, he had heaps-HEAPS) and the clincher was he flew his own helicopter.so he'd have to sell his vewy own humble house to repay $50k, would he?He wouldnt have even noticed 50k missing.I hope that Reith repaid every cent of it, but if it was the amount I suggested, Id be surprised. Lets just say we didnt hear too much more about it.Ive got a feeling that you and I covered it, if not, good, so he should have.

And right after that, wouldnt you know it, Labor and Liberals both entered into an agreement not to tarry on the petty subject of their members snouts in the trough and general bludging on the public.

I felt sorry for the Euro member last night. As he was a Conservative I probably would not have agreed with most of what he said, but he shouldn't have been subjected to half an hour of listening to our internal political wrangling when there was a lot about the European situation that he could have contributed to.

These are the sort of situations that Jones should have taken control over. The Labor leadership debate was allowed to drag on for too long, half the show as Shorten pointed out.

Have to agree with you there. I thought Jones was/is symptomatic of how the media sees itself these days-that is-not as a commentator/interviewer, but as a 'player' in the political sphere, an insider. There's a lot of ego there and it was on display last night, much to my annoyance too.

I hope that tonight is the last Q and A that is totally or even partially devoted to the ALP leadership challenge. There are only so many times you can tell this story and just so many angles you can view it from. Please move on. Ditto for 7:30 and Lateline. Please find some other political topics like policy analysis-now there's a novel idea.

Has anybody else noted that while being re-directed to the Q&A message board in response to the closure of this general board, discussion on that board is limited to topics initiated by the ABC? "We will determine who is allowed to comment here, and we will also determine what they are allowed to comment on!"

Sounds like a good idea for open discussion; NOT!!!

I wonder why the silence of those of a left tendency on this is so deafening?

So, given that dissent is about to be silenced, I guess this is the only place and time I will be able to register annoyance that true to form, the Q&A panel was biased to the left again last night. And this time it was grossly so, with 4 from the left vs 2 from the right. Quite naturally, even if Jones does give an equal go to each panellist (not his strong point in any case) this means Q&A becomes a platform whereby the left gets twice the airtime of the right.

But that is not bias, any more than Jones propensity to slap down and close off right commentary (even when it comes from the floor) while letting the left version run on and on. Two egregious instances of this last night were when there was firstly the invited question that referred to "the mad monk" (has there ever been an invited question that referred to "the two-faced backstabber" let alone anything that suggested lying?) and secondly when Jones asked an outspoken audience member if they voted Liberal, when similar outspoken left commentary is never so questioned.

If Jones seriously is trying to be impartial, then he is a pretty ordinary failure, and if the program directors and managers are, then they have demonstrated a failure that can only be defined as that attributable to complete idiocy. As I doubt that, it seems that last night was all about giving the left air-time to paper over the vast cracks and ruinous events of the last few weeks.

[quote]"So, given that dissent is about to be silenced, I guess this is the only place and time I will be able to register annoyance that true to form, the Q&A panel was biased to the left again last night. And this time it was grossly so, with 4 from the left vs 2 from the right. Quite naturally, even if Jones does give an equal go to each panellist (not his strong point in any case) this means Q&A becomes a platform whereby the left gets twice the airtime of the right."[/quote]

I presume it was because of the leadership spill. Seems reasonable to have a bias in favour of the Labor Party and fellow travellers given the subject matter.

Don't agree that the panel is more often stacked with lefties. I think you have to be a fervent right-winger to form that conclusion. Fortunately, we've never had any such on these forums.